IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/upf/upfgen/937.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On information and competition in private value auctions

Author

Abstract

How much information does an auctioneer want bidders to have in a private value environment? We address this question using a novel approach to ordering information structures based on the property that in private value settings more information leads to a more disperse distribution of buyers’ updated expected valuations. We define the class of precision criteria following this approach and different notions of dispersion, and relate them to existing criteria of informativeness. Using supermodular precision, we obtain three results: (1) a more precise information structure yields a more efficient allocation; (2) the auctioneer provides less than the efficient level of information since more information increases bidder informational rents; (3) there is a strategic complementarity between information and competition, so that both the socially efficient and the auctioneer’s optimal choice of precision increase with the number of bidders, and both converge as the number of bidders goes to infinity.

Suggested Citation

  • Juan José Ganuza & José S. Penalva, 2006. "On information and competition in private value auctions," Economics Working Papers 937, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, revised Jul 2006.
  • Handle: RePEc:upf:upfgen:937
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econ-papers.upf.edu/papers/937.pdf
    File Function: Whole Paper
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moscarini, Giuseppe & Ottaviani, Marco, 2001. "Price Competition for an Informed Buyer," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 457-493, December.
    2. Olivier Compte & Philippe Jehiel, 2007. "Auctions and information acquisition: sealed bid or dynamic formats?," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 38(2), pages 355-372, June.
    3. Marco LiCalzi, 2005. "A sufficient condition for all-or-nothing information supply in price discrimination," Game Theory and Information 0510005, EconWPA.
    4. Lewis, Tracy R & Sappington, David E M, 1994. "Supplying Information to Facilitate Price Discrimination," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 35(2), pages 309-327, May.
    5. Susan Athey, 2002. "Monotone Comparative Statics under Uncertainty," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 117(1), pages 187-223.
    6. Susan Athey & Jonathan Levin, 1998. "The Value of Information In Monotone Decision Problems," Working papers 98-24, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
    7. Milgrom, Paul & Shannon, Chris, 1994. "Monotone Comparative Statics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 62(1), pages 157-180, January.
    8. Dirk Bergemann & Juuso Valimaki, 2002. "Information Acquisition and Efficient Mechanism Design," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 1007-1033, May.
    9. Z. Fang & H. Joe, 1992. "Further developments on some dependence orderings for continuous bivariate distributions," Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, Springer;The Institute of Statistical Mathematics, vol. 44(3), pages 501-517, September.
    10. Nicola Persico, 2000. "Information Acquisition in Auctions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(1), pages 135-148, January.
    11. Milgrom, Paul R & Weber, Robert J, 1982. "A Theory of Auctions and Competitive Bidding," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(5), pages 1089-1122, September.
    12. Board, Simon, 2007. "Selling options," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 324-340, September.
    13. Stegeman, Mark, 1996. "Participation Costs and Efficient Auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 228-259, October.
    14. Kavajecz, Kenneth A. & Keim, Donald B., 2005. "Packaging Liquidity: Blind Auctions and Transaction Efficiencies," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 40(03), pages 465-492, September.
    15. Simon Board, 2009. "Revealing information in auctions: the allocation effect," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 38(1), pages 125-135, January.
    16. Juan-José Ganuza, 2004. "Ignorance Promotes Competition: An Auction Model of Endogenous Private Valuations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 35(3), pages 583-598, Autumn.
    17. Ohlin, Jan, 1969. "On a class of measures of dispersion with application to optimal reinsurance," ASTIN Bulletin: The Journal of the International Actuarial Association, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(02), pages 249-266, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Heski Bar-Isaac & Guillermo Caruana & Vicente Cuñat, 2010. "Information Gathering and Marketing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 375-401, June.
    2. Vasiliki Skreta, 2011. "On the informed seller problem: optimal information disclosure," Review of Economic Design, Springer;Society for Economic Design, vol. 15(1), pages 1-36, March.
    3. Bernhard Eckwert & Itzhak Zilcha, 2008. "Efficiency of Screening and Labor Income Inequality," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 10(1), pages 77-98, February.
    4. Alexander E. Saak, 2008. "THE VALUE OF PRIVATE INFORMATION IN MONOPOLY -super-," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(1), pages 169-189, March.
    5. Carlos Canon, 2011. "Matching & Information Provision by One-Sided and Two-Sided Platforms," Working Papers 11-20, NET Institute, revised Oct 2011.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Auctions; Competition; Private Values; Informativeness Criteria;

    JEL classification:

    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:upf:upfgen:937. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (). General contact details of provider: http://www.econ.upf.edu/ .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.